DOCSLIB.ORG

Perspectives on Reproduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Perspectives on Reproduction Stockholm University Linnaeus Center on Social Policy and Family Dynamics in Europe, SPaDE Feminist Perspectives on Motherhood and Reproduction Gerda Neyer and Laura Bernardi Working Paper 2011: 4 Feminist Perspectives on Motherhood and Reproduction* Gerda Neyer Stockholm University Demography Unit 106 91 Stockholm [email protected] Laura Bernardi University of Lausanne, Institute for Social Sciences Abstract: Motherhood and reproduction have been at the core of the feminist discourse about women's rights ever since its onset. For the first and second feminist movements, the right to abortion and the public recognition of motherhood have been main issues in the discourse on reproduction. Since the last two decades of the 20th century, the potentials of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) have opened up new venues of feminist discourse. In this paper we sketch the main feminist lines of argumentation regarding motherhood and reproduction since the 1970s, and we identify specific shifts in their recurrent issues. We argue that an essential contribution of feminism to the understanding of motherhood as a structuring category has been its insistence on the distinction between biological and social motherhood. Feminist discourse shows how ART has further decomposed biological motherhood and has altered the meaning of motherhood and reproduction. Feminist analysis maintains that despite the rhetoric of choice surrounding ART, these technologies have not increased women‟s reproductive freedom. The decomposition of biological motherhood, the medical, legal, and commercial development of reproduction, and the change in the social perception of motherhood have rather established new forms of control over female reproduction. * This paper is also available as a Stockholm Research Report in Demography 2 1. Introduction Reproduction and motherhood have been at the core of the feminist and women‟s movements ever since their emergence. And from the start, reproduction and motherhood have been highly contested issues – both within the feminist movements and beyond. Yet, over the past 30 years, Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) has fundamentally altered the ways of reproduction and the perception of it, as ART has gained in importance not only for individual procreation, but also for population development. ART has opened up the possibility of childbearing to groups of women and men who did not have this option before, such as sub-fecund and infertile women, to women and men with other health problems, to gays, lesbians, and transsexuals, and to women beyond menopause. Since the late 1970s, about 3.75 million babies were born after ART treatment worldwide (ESHRE 2010). Despite the fact that the success rate of ART (that is the rate of live births after treatment) lies at only about 30% (Center for Disease Control and Preventions 2010), it is assumed that more than half of the estimated 9% of infertile women (aged 20-44) will seek ART treatment. This will amount to about 40.5 million women undergoing ART treatment worldwide (Boivin et al. 2007). With ART accounting for currently between about 1% and 4% of the birth rates in European countries (ESHRE 2010; Sobotka et al. 2008), some researchers regard ART as a viable method within a population policy mix that aims to increase fertility (Grant et al. 2006). The effects of ART on fertility trends have already been visible for some time: Multiple births have increased due to the practice of transferring more than one embryo to the uterus (Hoem and Strandberg 2004) and childbearing at ages above 45 and in particular above 50 has been rising (Billari et al. 2007). The changes brought about by ART at the individual and the societal level have fuelled new discourses and controversies over motherhood, childbearing, and reproduction, and over the implications of ART for women and for gender relationships on the private, societal, and global level.1 In this paper we present the main lines of argument and the main viewpoints appearing in Post- World War II feminist discourse on motherhood and reproduction. Our intention is to depict essential changes in the perception and reasoning brought about by the development of ART. 1 There is much less discourse about the implications of ART for men and masculinity. In this paper, we will not review the literature on such issues systematically. 3 With its focus on the consequences of ART for procreation, for women‟s (and men‟s) lives across the world, on the perception and social representation of motherhood, parenthood and reproduction, the feminist discourse – more than other discourses – reflect the social and gender transformations due to ART. The discourse thus points to implications of ART which reach far beyond its effects on individual childbearing behavior and population development. The plethora of contributions to the feminist literature on this topic and the broad spectrum of approaches, arguments, and perspectives make it impossible to give a complete account of the development, content, and features of the feminist discourse on reproduction and motherhood in the range of one paper. Nor is it possible to detail the discourses about the various processes and techniques of ART. Our reading of the feminist literature since the 1970s has convinced us that despite advances in ART and in feminist reflections about them, it is justified to present the latter without reference to the specific ARTs, albeit this comes at the cost of a (regrettable) loss of demonstrating the foresight and sophistication of the feminist perceptions of ART and its development. We restrict ourselves to presenting some of the main arguments. In our presentation we do not distinguish explicitly between the positions of the various strands of feminism (although we occasionally refer to them) nor do we strictly follow the historical development of the feminist discourse. We have abstained from organizing the feminist positions along the “classical” lines of liberal, radical, and Marxist feminism, of “second-wave” and “third-wave” feminism, or of any other types of feminisms, because such a classification would require that we also point out the differences between and commonalities within each of these lines as well. Such a complex analysis would go far beyond the scope of this paper. Moreover, it would require that we put the emphasis on differences within feminist discourses rather than on perceptions and argumentations which were maintained or altered through ART. Yet, focusing on central categories of the feminist discourse rather than on differences between types of feminism also bears some risk, not least the risk of brushing over fundamental differences among feminism and of ignoring some essential lines. In addition, the categories which we study (motherhood and reproduction) are so closely interlinked that separating them often becomes difficult and may seem artificial. Furthermore, as we will show later, feminist theories have insisted in separating motherhood and reproduction in order to overcome the conflation between them. ART has induced further conceptual divisions in motherhood and has enlarged the gap 4 between reproduction and motherhood, something which many feminists view rather critically. Separating motherhood and reproduction for the purpose of reconstructing the feminist discourse about them may thus lead us to overlook how much a development brought about by ART has already permeated our thinking about these issues. 2. Motherhood 2.1. Motherhood as a contested feminist concept Motherhood has been one of the issues which have split feminist movements. Most women become mothers, and many feminists have regarded motherhood as a uniting element among women and have based their claims to rights for women on it.2 On the other hand, the issue of motherhood has also been one of the anchor points for denying women rights and equality and for discriminating against them. Starting from this observation, the mainstream feminist discourse up to the mid-1980s took a critical approach to motherhood and regarded the rejection of motherhood as a pre-requisite for overcoming women‟s subordination and for gaining equality. This position was advocated by de Beauvoir already in her seminal book the Second Sex. She stated that “[i]t was fraudulent to maintain that through maternity woman becomes concretely man‟s equal” (de Beauvoir 1953, 525). She considered motherhood as the main feature which caused women to be seen as “others” and to tie them to immanence. She felt that women are made to see motherhood as the essence of their life and the fulfillment of their destiny (de Beauvoir 1953, 484 ff.). In her view, the decision to become a mother is therefore never performed “in complete liberty”, not even through ART (de Beauvoir 1953, 696). She saw motherhood as enforced maternity (de Beauvoir 1953, 724). Changing laws and institutions, or even changing the whole social context, would not suffice to change the conditions and the consequences of motherhood for women. The latter requires overcoming immanence and “otherness” through transcendence (de Beauvoir 1953, 717; 725), which in essence implies that 2 For historical studies on motherhood as a means of claims to rights, see Bock and Thane (1991), Koven and Michel (1993). For a recent example of “mother-centered” claims, see Müttermanifest (Erler et al. 1987). The latter split the German feminist movement. 5 women can only free themselves from their confines by foregoing motherhood. Although de Beauvoir‟s approach and positions received much criticism from feminists, particularly for being a-historic and for essentializing “woman”, feminists critical of motherhood shared her perception of maternity as a means to maintain women‟s inferior social and economic status as “objects” and to deny them the right to determine their position. As Carole Pateman (1988 and 1989) has pointed out, the de-valuation of motherhood (and women) was a consequence of the patriarchal construction of sexual difference. Through the fraternal (social) contract men became equal as members of society. Women were relegated to “nature”, with childbearing and motherhood forming the core of women‟s nature.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kate Millet— Women, Aids & Choice
    THE JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE FOR PROGRESSIVES VOL X1988 $2.95 •KATE MILLET— An Exclusive Interview •a Prostitute and a Ph.D. speak out on WOMEN, AIDS & CHOICE •THE TEEN WHO REFUSED TO KILL THE TEEN WHO JUST SAID "NO!" 15 • New York Pro-Choice Coalition How a 15-Year-Old Woman demonstrator puts her politics on the Turned A School front line at rally in front of St. Patrick's System Upside Down FEATURES Cathedral during "Operation Rescue"- INTERVIEW BY Photo by Bettye Lane BREAKING THE BARRIERS ROBERTA KALECHOFSKY Merle Hoffman Interviews Kate Millet DEPARTMENTS Cover Photography NO MANDATORY TESTING! 10 Bettye Lane A Feminist Prostitute Speaks Out Editorial: Merle Hoffman 1 BY CAROL LEIGH ON THE ISSUES HIV-POSITIVE WOMEN HAVE We've Come A Long Way??? 4 RIGHTS TOO— 11 Feedback 25 and They're Often Denied BY BARBARA SANTEE, Ph.D. Choice Books 18 of nightsticks, sawhorses being shoved into my face, the mounting tension of the crowds around ON THE ISSUES me and the palpable smell of danger—was something quite different from anything I had ever experienced. "Where are your troops, Hoffman?" [ON THE My questioner had verbalized one of my private intellectual dialogues. But really not so private— | THE JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE FOR PROGRESSIVES I after all, the question of just where the feminist VOL. X, 1988 movement is now, where the feminist movement is going and is the feminist movement alive or dead, ad infinitum—has become the intellectual staple, PUBLISHER/EDITOR IN CHIEF Merle Hoffman the core issue around which media, feminists, politicians and anyone who feels like it can instantly MANAGING EDITOR pontificate.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Rights
    Reproductive Rights Oxford Handbooks Online Reproductive Rights Véronique Mottier The Oxford Handbook of Gender and Politics Edited by Georgina Waylen, Karen Celis, Johanna Kantola, and S. Laurel Weldon Print Publication Date: Mar 2013 Subject: Political Science, Comparative Politics Online Publication Date: Aug 2013 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199751457.013.0008 Abstract and Keywords This article discusses feminist scholarship on three specific areas of the politics of reproduction. It first defines the concept of reproduction as the production of offspring; reproduction is also considered as a key theme of feminist theory and political practice before and after Simone de Beauvoir. The article then studies state control over the procreative choices of the citizens, specifically the eugenic population policies introduced during the first few decades of the twentieth century. The next section focuses on feminist mobilization around abortion and contraceptive rights and outlines the ways reproductive rights have been included in the political arena due to women’s movements. The article concludes with a study of the impact of the latest reproductive technologies on modern politics of gender along with the feminist responses to the challenges posed by recent improvements in this area. Keywords: reproduction, feminist scholarship, feminist theory, Simone de Beauvoir, procreative choices, feminist mobilization, abortion, reproductive rights, reproductive technologies, feminist responses Introduction Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex, first published in 1949, famously blamed women’s reproductive bodies and activities for their subordinate social status. Writing at a time when marriage and motherhood constituted the main horizon of female social respectability, de Beauvoir portrayed marriage, housework, and childcare as mutually reinforcing women’s dependence on men.
    [Show full text]
  • Life Itself’: a Socio-Historic Examination of FINRRAGE
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by White Rose E-theses Online From ‘Death of the Female’ to ‘Life Itself’: A Socio-Historic Examination of FINRRAGE Stevienna Marie de Saille Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Leeds School of Sociology and Social Policy September 2012 ii The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. © 2012, The University of Leeds and Stevienna Marie de Saille The right of Stevienna Marie de Saille to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are a number of people who made this thesis possible in a number of different, fantastically important ways. My deepest thanks to: - My supervisors, Prof. Anne Kerr and Dr. Paul Bagguley, for their patience, advice, editorial comments, and the occasional kickstart when the project seemed just a little(!) overwhelming, and my examiners, Prof. Maureen McNeil and Dr. Angharad Beckett for their insight and suggestions. - The School of Sociology and Social Policy, for awarding me the teaching bursary which made this possible, and all the wonderful faculty and support staff who made it an excellent experience. - The archivists in Special Collections at the University of Leeds, and to the volunteers at the Feminist Archive North for giving me an all-access pass.
    [Show full text]
  • What Counts As Feminist Theory?
    What counts as feminist theory? [May-July 2003/2009:] This is one of the papers referred to in ‘Introduction to the refereed papers’. I wrote the paper in 1999, in response to the pre-publicity for the journal, Feminist Theory, which had asked for submissions on the question of what counts as feminist theory (among others). I sent it off in time for the inaugural issue of the journal, which appeared in 2000. It was sent to three reviewers, two of whom argued against publishing it. The third recommended publication despite some disagreements she had with it, but the majority prevailed and I received a letter telling me my paper had been rejected. I wrote a reply to the letter and to the readers’ reports, pointing out a number of problems with the reasons given for the rejection. (This reply is included below, at the end of the paper). When the first issue of the journal appeared, the editorial referred approvingly to ‘feminist theory in all its many and diverse forms’, and contained the following statement: ‘We intend this journal to be … a place where all shades of feminist opinion can be aired … we neither wish to impose any form of theoretical orthodoxy nor any single definition of what counts as feminist theory. This theoretical heterodoxy is central to our project’ (Griffin et al, 2000: 5). In the light of the rejection of my paper and the inadequacy of the reasons given, this statement rang somewhat hollow. It sounded to me like an example of what Herbert Marcuse referred to as ‘repressive tolerance’ (Marcuse, 1969), the claim to be all- inclusive and accepting that functions to reduce everything to the lowest common denominator of irrelevance.
    [Show full text]
  • Feminism and the 'Woman As Mother' Discourse in Reproductive Politics In
    Feminism and the ‘Woman Equals Mother’ Discourse in Reproductive Politics in Australia A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Discipline of Gender, Work and Social Inquiry School of Social Sciences Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Adelaide April 2012 Angella Duvnjak BA(Hons) (Adelaide University) BSW (Flinders University) i ii Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................... iii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................... v Declaration ........................................................................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................ viii Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background: The journey to ‘here’ 1 1.2 Time, Context and Structure of the Thesis 5 1.2.1 Situating the research questions .................................................................................................. 7 1.2.2 Research questions ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • From Test-Tube Women to Bodies Without Women Women's Studies
    Women's Studies International Forum 31 (2008) 157–175 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Women's Studies International Forum journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wsif From test-tube women to bodies without women Renate Klein Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering (FINRRAGE), PO Box 212, North Melbourne Victoria 3051, Australia article info synopsis Available online 5 June 2008 In this article I summarise twenty-five years of international feminist resistance to reproductive and genetic engineering. Drawing on the work of FINRRAGE (Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering) I list the main objections of feminist critics to the global commodification of women. Under the guise of ‘doing good’ and the catch cry ‘women want it’ (i.e. allegedly to alleviate the suffering of infertility/too much fertility, or eliminate genetic imperfection), reproductive and genetic engineers have reduced women — and their babies — to a series of body parts and tissues that can be traded, screened and eliminated at will. Discussions include the many physiological as well as psychological dangers inherent in the medicalisation of in/fertile women's lives and their children through the Big Business of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and related genetic technologies in a global context. I also critically examine the pro-technology position of liberal feminists including their much touted concept of ‘choice’. Lastly, I ask where the recent opening of the door to embryonic stem cell research via commercial and ‘altruistic’ egg cell ‘donation’ is taking society and how long it will be before cloning of human beings is justified as ‘for our own good’ and women's alienation to their own body (parts) will lead to their annihilation.
    [Show full text]
  • Derridean Deconstruction and Feminism
    DERRIDEAN DECONSTRUCTION AND FEMINISM: Exploring Aporias in Feminist Theory and Practice Pam Papadelos Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Discipline of Gender, Work and Social Inquiry Adelaide University December 2006 Contents ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................III DECLARATION .....................................................................................................IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................V INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 THESIS STRUCTURE AND OVERVIEW......................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1: LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS – FEMINISM AND DECONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................... 8 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 8 FEMINIST CRITIQUES OF PHILOSOPHY..................................................................... 10 Is Philosophy Inherently Masculine? ................................................................ 11 The Discipline of Philosophy Does Not Acknowledge Feminist Theories......... 13 The Concept of a Feminist Philosopher is Contradictory Given the Basic Premises of Philosophy.....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Defending Intimacy Against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms
    The University of Manchester Research Defending Intimacy against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms DOI: 10.1086/692518 Document Version Final published version Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA): Lewis, S. (2017). Defending Intimacy against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture & Society, 43(1), 97-125. [1]. https://doi.org/10.1086/692518 Published in: Signs: Journal of Women in Culture & Society Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on Manchester Research Explorer is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Proof version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Explorer are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Takedown policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please refer to the University of Manchester’s Takedown Procedures [http://man.ac.uk/04Y6Bo] or contact [email protected] providing relevant details, so we can investigate your claim. Download date:27. Sep. 2021 Sophie Lewis Defending Intimacy against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms t is now a simple fact that surrogacy is a booming, global business,” reads a memorandum posted under the heading “The Parentage/Surrogacy I 1 Project” at the Hague Conference on Private International Law. But the ambivalent term “parentage/surrogacy” implies a philosophical open- mindedness about the difference between the two terms that is reflected al- most nowhere else in public discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • Choice, Control and Issues of Informed Consent: the New Reproductive and Pre-Birth Technologies, Robyn Rowland
    CHOICE, CONTROL AND ISSUES OF INFORMED CONSENT: THE NEW REPRODUCTIVE AND PRE-BIRTH TECHNOLOGIES1 Dr. Robyn Rowland Social Psychologist Senior Lecturer in Women’s Studies School of Humanities Deakin University Victoria, 3217, Australia. Paper delivered to the Annual Conference of the American Society of Law and Medicine, Sydney, August 1986; and to the Law Reform Commission of Victoria Symposia 1986: Informed Consent. 2 In Australia, particularly in Victoria, there has been heated public debate about the social implications of the new reproductive technologies. One of the initial arguments put forward by the medical researchers for introducing this technology was that ‘women want it’. This catchcry has been slightly rephrased recently by both the medical researchers and the users of this technology. The emerging argument is that a woman should have ‘the right to choose’ to use the technologies. Feminists have argued that women have been used as experimental subjects and living laboratories on reproductive technology programs. The very evidence of women’s experimental status which has been produced by feminists, is now being used to argue an informed consent theme by users of the technology and civil libertarians. Inherent in this line of debate is the assumption that if women are fully informed, there are no problems with the technology and all is well. I will analyse both these claims: a woman’s right to choose, and the demands for informed consent. I argue that at the base of both is an individualism which conflicts with the social implications of the technologies which themselves impact on all members of society, but particularly on women as a social group.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Reproductive Freedom
    RETHINKING REPRODUCTIVE FfiEEDOhI: IX-VITRB FERTILIZATION AND A WOh.lAi"tl'S SIGHT TO CHOOSE Vaf da Dohlen B.A., University of Regina 1988 Honours Certificate, University of Regma 1990 THESIS SUBMTTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUmhENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Depal-tment ot Women's Studies O Valda N. Dohlen 1992 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY July 1992 rights reserved. "This work may not be reproduced in xvE,ole or in part, by photocopy or otkr means, without permissio~iof the author. Acquisitions and L?iredion des acquisitions et Bibtiographic Sewices Branch des sewices brbi!ographrqt;es The author has granted an t'autetnr a accord@ une iicen~e irrevocable non-exclusive licence irrevocabfe et non exclusive allowing the National Library of perrnettant la Bibliothbque Canada to reproduce, loan, nationale du Canada de distribute or sell copies sf reproduire, preter, distribuer ou -- his/her thesis by any means and vendre des copies de sa these in any form or format, making de quelque rnaniere et sovs this thesis available to interested queique forme que ce soit pour persons. mettre des exemplaires de cette these 6 la disposition des personnes interessees. The author retains ownership of L'auteur conserve la propri6lb du the copyright in his/her thesis. droit d'auteur qui protege sa Neither the thesis nor substantial these. Ni la thhse ni des extraits extracts from it may be printed or substantiels de celte-ci ne otherwise reproduced without doivent etre imprimes ou hisfher permission. autrement repreduits sans son - autorisation. Name: Vaida Dohiert Degree: 34as:er of Arts Title of*Thesis: Rethinking Kep:odttcrit.s Freedom: In-t-iiso Fertilization and a tiroman's Right to Ciioox Examining Committee: Chair.
    [Show full text]
  • Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project
    This is a repository copy of Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/91388/ Version: Accepted Version Article: de Saille, S. (2014) Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project. Sociological Research Online, 19 (3). 18. ISSN 1360-7804 https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.3331 Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ 2012:176:1 'Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project' Stevienna de Saille, University of Sheffield Abstract: This paper draws on a socio-historic case study of the Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering (FINRRAGE) in order to consider the ways in which activists create and develop knowledge in movements around complex emergent technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • INFORMATION to USERS the Most Advanced Technology Has Been Used to Photo­ Graph and Reproduce This Manuscript from the Microfilm Master
    INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from a computer printer. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Accessing the World's Information since 1938 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA Order Number 881229S The case for identity creation: Reproductive technology and the rhetoric of social intervention Pondozzi, Jeannine C., Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1988 Copyright ©1988 by Pondozzi, Jeannine C. All rights reserved. UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy.
    [Show full text]